Replies

Agreed. But whatever the case, I feel like the backlash was over the top and blown up severely. Not saying I'm an advocate of pay to win in multiplayer, I'm really not, but I probably wouldn't have minded it as it wouldn't have really been 'p2w' as such, more pay to get a bit of an advantage. Irritation or anger in the gaming community is of course understandable, it directly affects them us, but I was just really annoyed by the bad light the media painted this game in, and the negative 'reviews' that didn't acknowledge that actually, the game is good, it's fun, Star Wars-y, and all round a good shooter, which is what a review should focus on. Instead, they were all 'oh this game was going to have P2W. 6/10'. And that really annoyed me, probably irrationally so.
But I don't think people really understand that MTx are actually necessary for a live service game, and they are different to Pay to Win.

This game never had "p2w"... it had "pay2reducegrinding"... this is no different than what is present in games like WoW or Diablo or even Battlefield games where you could buy XP boosts. Just because you can buy progression doesn't mean you will win anything.

Agreed. But whatever the case, I feel like the backlash was over the top and blown up severely. Not saying I'm an advocate of pay to win in multiplayer, I'm really not, but I probably wouldn't have minded it as it wouldn't have really been 'p2w' as such, more pay to get a bit of an advantage. Irritation or anger in the gaming community is of course understandable, it directly affects them us, but I was just really annoyed by the bad light the media painted this game in, and the negative 'reviews' that didn't acknowledge that actually, the game is good, it's fun, Star Wars-y, and all round a good shooter, which is what a review should focus on. Instead, they were all 'oh this game was going to have P2W. 6/10'. And that really annoyed me, probably irrationally so.
But I don't think people really understand that MTx are actually necessary for a live service game, and they are different to Pay to Win.

Perhaps the response was a bit extreme. I can agree, since I think this game is crazy fun at its best. But EA built such a reputation for themselves after many years of shady practices, and another push towards even greedier behavior pushed the gaming community over the edge. There might have been hate bandwagoning, but I don’t think it’s fair to place the blame for the game’s current status on the people. EA chose to be money-grubbing jerks, and they decided to build a game with a progression system that felt more catered to making bank than making a good player experience.

I think DICE deserves better, but so so many of the dev studios that EA has swallowed over the years. Bioware, Pandemic... and surely more tragedies to come.

EA is a terrible company and I revel in seeing them get some comeuppance. It gives me hope for a better gaming industry. It’s just a shame to see the collateral damage in the form of quality developers and games like this one.

Agreed. But whatever the case, I feel like the backlash was over the top and blown up severely. Not saying I'm an advocate of pay to win in multiplayer, I'm really not, but I probably wouldn't have minded it as it wouldn't have really been 'p2w' as such, more pay to get a bit of an advantage. Irritation or anger in the gaming community is of course understandable, it directly affects them us, but I was just really annoyed by the bad light the media painted this game in, and the negative 'reviews' that didn't acknowledge that actually, the game is good, it's fun, Star Wars-y, and all round a good shooter, which is what a review should focus on. Instead, they were all 'oh this game was going to have P2W. 6/10'. And that really annoyed me, probably irrationally so.
But I don't think people really understand that MTx are actually necessary for a live service game, and they are different to Pay to Win.

Perhaps the response was a bit extreme. I can agree, since I think this game is crazy fun at its best. But EA built such a reputation for themselves after many years of shady practices, and another push towards even greedier behavior pushed the gaming community over the edge. There might have been hate bandwagoning, but I don’t think it’s fair to place the blame for the game’s current status on the people. EA chose to be money-grubbing jerks, and they decided to build a game with a progression system that felt more catered to making bank than making a good player experience.

I think DICE deserves better, but so so many of the dev studios that EA has swallowed over the years. Bioware, Pandemic... and surely more tragedies to come.

EA is a terrible company and I revel in seeing them get some comeuppance. It gives me hope for a better gaming industry. It’s just a shame to see the collateral damage in the form of quality developers and games like this one.

I feel like the Star Wars Licence shouldn't be the only thing taken from EA. As much as i hate EA i really wish DICE transferred to a new publisher. They are incredible at making games with such gems as the battlefield games, (other than hardline) and even this game. I now that DICE can make a true classic someday its just EA consistently holds them back with the business models they force DICE to implement into their games. There's actually a rumor going around that some of the recent leaks we are getting are from a DICE developer who is tired of EA's limitations and is doing what he can to keep us happy. I agree that EA is an awful company and they deserve the hate, not DICE they are caught in the crossfire.

What skewed things more towards P2W though was the star cards were only available from crates, and your progression was 100% based on the level of the cards you had unlocked. Playing the game did nothing towards progression like pretty much any other game.

Now it is how it should have been.

It took me a while to figure out why my Heavy was a lower rank than my Officer and Specialist. I rarely touched Specialist and played Heavy the most. So I was slow but eventually realized it only had to do with the cards unlocked and their level. I got alot of cards for Specialist and Officer early on.
Once I understood this I saw what the problem was and why people were rightly upset.

... Instead, they were all 'oh this game was going to have P2W. 6/10'. And that really annoyed me, probably irrationally so.

I don't think it was an irrational response. There were "reviewers" bringing up "Battlefront II was P2W, we must all hate them!!!" four months after they were removed from the game. They'd still be talking about it if it got them a few more clicks or youtube views.

What skewed things more towards P2W though was the star cards were only available from crates, and your progression was 100% based on the level of the cards you had unlocked. Playing the game did nothing towards progression like pretty much any other game.

Now it is how it should have been.

It took me a while to figure out why my Heavy was a lower rank than my Officer and Specialist. I rarely touched Specialist and played Heavy the most. So I was slow but eventually realized it only had to do with the cards unlocked and their level. I got alot of cards for Specialist and Officer early on.
Once I understood this I saw what the problem was and why people were rightly upset.

The primary method of upgrading Star Cards and thus leveling was not through random acquisition, it was through the acquisition of crafting parts. You earned credits which you exchanged for crates which had crafting parts in them and random star cards... after the initial rush of getting random cards which were useful everything became duplicates and you could calculate very accurately how many credits it would take you to get the 480 crafting parts per epic card. I even posted a topic at the time which showed that the credits to crafting parts conversion was incredibly consistant.

I think the backlash was a result of a build up of rage through many games.
Overall I think it was positive. All publishers and developers will be careful to introduce any resemblance of P2W mechanics in new games.

This game never had "p2w"... it had "pay2reducegrinding"... this is no different than what is present in games like WoW or Diablo or even Battlefield games where you could buy XP boosts. Just because you can buy progression doesn't mean you will win anything.

You said it all. The game was actually "pay go gamble". You could spend over $1000 and not even have everything at max.

The problem is that the players bugged on that "p2w is evil" thing in this game.

All Dice games you have a shortcut kit, even bf2015 you have that option where you can buy those kits and I never saw that crying on other games the way we have here.

Also the game have already enough time where players could have upgraded their stuff at least for the classes they play more and I dont see any problem adding to this game now. If the new players want to spend money now to feel more powerfull, I dont see any problem, it will also help the devs with more profits, resulting in more content.

Also it has more chances that new casual players will just give up after joining some rounds, get rekt and see that everyone is maxed out.

... Instead, they were all 'oh this game was going to have P2W. 6/10'. And that really annoyed me, probably irrationally so.

I don't think it was an irrational response. There were "reviewers" bringing up "Battlefront II was P2W, we must all hate them!!!" four months after they were removed from the game. They'd still be talking about it if it got them a few more clicks or youtube views.

The people basing the entirety of the game's enjoyment off of MTXs is really what's wrong with the game now. People refuse to give any sort of valid opinion on the current state because they have it in their minds it's still a trash game no matter what changes just because it has loot boxes. Call of Duty has been doing it for years, and yet it's ok with them to do it? For game-changing weapons that can give a massive advantage exclusive to the boxes? Yes the cards here were, but the bonuses were miniscule and everything could be countered. They can't hate one because it's easy and ignore a past thing because it suits their needs.

What skewed things more towards P2W though was the star cards were only available from crates, and your progression was 100% based on the level of the cards you had unlocked. Playing the game did nothing towards progression like pretty much any other game.

Now it is how it should have been.

It took me a while to figure out why my Heavy was a lower rank than my Officer and Specialist. I rarely touched Specialist and played Heavy the most. So I was slow but eventually realized it only had to do with the cards unlocked and their level. I got alot of cards for Specialist and Officer early on.
Once I understood this I saw what the problem was and why people were rightly upset.

The primary method of upgrading Star Cards and thus leveling was not through random acquisition, it was through the acquisition of crafting parts. You earned credits which you exchanged for crates which had crafting parts in them and random star cards... after the initial rush of getting random cards which were useful everything became duplicates and you could calculate very accurately how many credits it would take you to get the 480 crafting parts per epic card. I even posted a topic at the time which showed that the credits to crafting parts conversion was incredibly consistant.

Oh I had completely figured it out.
But at the beginning there was no clear explanation and that turned off ALOT of people at the beginning. It was a new way of doing things and the loot boxes were intended to be tightly knit with it.

Alot of my friends would not listen to me it wasn't as bad as they thought. Through them I see though what alot of other people were thinking.

People are used to progressing simply by playing that unit/class/weapon whatever. This game was not like that. Now it is.